Jump to content

Star Wars Disenchantment


John

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Except me. I don't think he likes me. 

 

You didn't address me. You were talking with others about me. Can you really blame me after this:

 

😄😄😄😄

Shut up, you arrogant troll.

 

 

15 hours ago, I did respond to you:

 

  18 hours ago, Demodex said:

The anticipation for Episode 9 is way different from that for Solo. Saying Episode 9 will fail because Solo didn't pull in fantastic numbers is being naive. 

 

People hated the prequels and they still made a ton of money (I assume, I don't follow box office numbers).  Episode 9 will be successful. I know quite a few people that didn't go see Solo but will see Episode 9 for multiple reasons I've expressed already in this thread. 

 

I didn't compare Solo's box office tally to the saga films. It grossed less than 40% of the other spin-off filmDid only 40% of fans and general public turn out? Perhaps only the fans saw it... or only the general public? Who can say? But this pitiful showing is indicative of a serious problem with the Star Wars movie-going public. Brushing off this fact and assuming people will turn out in droves for IX "is being naive".

 

For every reason you've expressed people will support Episode 9, I've expressed a dozen to the contrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Arpy said:

Mattris is a troll, he lives for this shit.

 

Once again, in this Star Wars Disenchantment thread, calling me a "troll" means that you are the troll.

 

Instead of name-calling, why don't you respond to my specific observations and opinions that I've brought up over the last few pages?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I and others have responded to your observations countless times, but you seem keen to stick to your narrative that Disney has fucked the Star Wars films over. As I've now said, countless times, none of our responses or arguments are going to sway your opinion...

 

The fact that you can't address any of our responses and rebuttals without resorting to posting inane and irrelevant, and highly speculative drivel makes you a bonafide troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You claimed to know and/or understand (I forget which) a movie you've seen a single time almost a year ago better than anyone.  I think that does make you arrogant.  At that point, to boast something like that, I figured you were trolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's almost hilarious now when watching those 1997 docos featuring interviews with high profile people from the time talking about its deep cultural significance, its philosophical influence, and its metaphysical saturation among fans and audiences. I mean... were these people serious?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was great about watching the Empire doco especially, was how down-to-earth and open the filmmakers were about what they were doing, without any of the cultural iconicism that saturates every new BTS feature since TPM. There hadn't yet come the reverence for the franchise that almost overshadows the films. 

 

Kershner and Lucas were making a space movie with laser swords and romance, now it's reverence flowing out of everyone's ass at how mystical and powerful the stories were... Yeesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2018 at 8:40 PM, John said:

To be fair, considering how his popularity is almost 100% based on his costume and nothing else, canceling the Boba Fett standalone is probably a smart move on Lucasfilm’s part. 

 

After the utter failure of Solo (including its major production problems do to Kathleen Kennedy's lack of leadership), Bob Iger has obviously decided to focus on Episode 9. He wants the public to focus on it too. The direction of Lucasfilm rides on its success.

 

Boba Fett found the Millennium Falcon when the Imperial Fleet - under the command Darth Vader himself - couldn't. On Cloud City, Fett spoke back to Vader, who gave him straight answers. Vader respected Fett enough to allow him to take his bounty, carbon-frozen Han Solo. So no, his popularity is not "almost 100% based on his costume and nothing else". Boba Fett is a bad-ass. And if he survived the Sarlaac Pit, he could make an appearance in The Mandalorian.

 

On 10/31/2018 at 4:26 PM, Stefancos said:

Did you verify the CNBC graph as being accurate? What is the source of their info? 

 

Were you serious with the question? Check Wikipedia. Or do you not trust that either?

 

On 11/2/2018 at 1:03 AM, Demodex said:

Does Disney make money off of the books, comics, toys, soundtracks, etc?

If you factor all those in I bet they're doing fairly well financially in regards to Star Wars. 

 

fairly well financially?  The films have grossed ~$4.8 billion. As per movie theater standard, Disney got about 60% of that (with the theater chains keeping the remaining 40%). That leaves $2.88B. Cost of producing and marketing the films is roughly $1.88B ($450-500M times 4 films). Only $1 billion (net) remains. Toy/merchandise/media sales... maybe another $1 billion. So $2 total (net). But Lucasfilm cost $4.05B. DISNEY IS STILL ~$2 BILLION IN THE RED WITH LUCASFILM. And this doesn't include the (very expensive) cost of the two Star Wars Lands at the amusement parks, which I suppose will be offset by park ticket sales (past, present, and future).

 

On 11/4/2018 at 8:50 PM, Arpy said:

I and others have responded to your observations countless times, but you seem keen to stick to your narrative that Disney has fucked the Star Wars films over. As I've now said, countless times, none of our responses or arguments are going to sway your opinion...

 

The fact that you can't address any of our responses and rebuttals without resorting to posting inane and irrelevant, and highly speculative drivel makes you a bonafide troll.

 

Wrong. I didn't say "Disney has fucked the Star Wars films over". I'm saying the films they've made (with Kathleen Kennedy at the helm) are highly problematic to a significant portion of the fanbase. I said that it's indisputable that the fandom is badly broken since a Star Wars film lost Disney $200 million.

 

I'm not expecting your responses or arguments to sway my opinion. But over the last 5 pages, or so, I've made numerous specific points and asked numerous questions. You're free to ignore them, but don't say that you "and others have responded" when it's not true.

 

I'm almost single-handedly addressing all of your responses and rebuttals. Please tell me, exactly what have I said that is "inane and irrelevant, and highly speculative"?

 

Continuing to post in a Star Wars Disenchantment thread - and resorting to insulting the primary individual that is disenchanted - when you are not disenchanted with Star Wars... is the definition of a troll.

 

And it appears you ignored this:

Since you can't back up your claims, why should anyone take your fretting with any seriousness?

 

SOLO.

 

Lucasfilm admitted a course correction is needed.

 

On 11/4/2018 at 8:55 PM, Demodex said:

You claimed to know and/or understand (I forget which) a movie you've seen a single time almost a year ago better than anyone.  I think that does make you arrogant.  At that point, to boast something like that, I figured you were trolling.

 

"better than anyone who has seen the movie once and not read the novelization" It was a bold statement - but not unrealistic. Do I strike you as the trolling type? I'm as serious as the state of Star Wars right now.

 

On 11/4/2018 at 9:53 PM, Arpy said:

What was great about watching the Empire doco especially, was how down-to-earth and open the filmmakers were about what they were doing, without any of the cultural iconicism that saturates every new BTS feature since TPM. There hadn't yet come the reverence for the franchise that almost overshadows the films. 

 

Kershner and Lucas were making a space movie with laser swords and romance, now it's reverence flowing out of everyone's ass at how mystical and powerful the stories were... Yeesh.

 

Those space movies with laser swords and romance were powerful. The latest movies are so powerful they have demolished an entire franchise and fandom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what's going to happen, folks. Soon the promo campaign is going to kick off where everyone involved will be claiming that J.J. has created a genuine miracle and that Episode IX is not only their favorite Star Wars movie, but also their favorite movie, bar none. The hype is going to start to grow again, the fans will be drooling, and the disillusioned are slowly but surely building hope again ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solo's failure isn't an argument. No film is guranteed success, critically or financially. Were Disney hoping for a success? Of course, yet the film was a spin-off that was riding on the coattails of TLJ, audience receptivity was low, and the character of Han Solo wasn't strong enough to demand a standalone film. What does a multi-billion dollar company do? They shit out a turd, and hope that some of it sticks. 

 

Please @Mattris these latest films haven't even put a dent in demolishing the franchise, The Prequels probably did more to harm it than these last three films have. The fandom was still strong back in those days and the release of various merchandise still has the collector fanbase frothing at the mouth for more. Calm your doomsaying.

 

Oh, and Mattris, i didn't say I wasn't disenchanted with Star Wars, and no, it didn't take Kathleen Kennedy doing her job for me to come to that conclusion, it was the toxic part of the fandom, the Mattris's of the world over that disenchanted me, because I felt insecure in liking a franchise that was ridiculed ad nauseum because of crybabies. When I enter into discussions on Facebook or share a post, I risk the instant ridicule by people who are convinced that because they disliked TLJ, I'm strange for liking it. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Arpy said:

Solo's failure isn't an argument. No film is guranteed success, critically or financially. Were Disney hoping for a success? Of course, yet the film was a spin-off that was riding on the coattails of TLJ, audience receptivity was low, and the character of Han Solo wasn't' strong enough to demand a standalone film. What does a multi-billion dollar company do? They shit out a turd, and hope that some of it sticks. 

 

Please @Mattris these latest films haven't even put a dent in demolishing the franchise, The Prequels probably did more to harm it than these last three films have. The fandom was still strong back in those days and the release of various merchandise still has collector fanbase frothing at the mouth for more. Calm your doomsaying.

 

The Prequels did not do "more to harm it than these" Disney films... not a chance. You really don't feel the disenchanted vibe online, do you? Are you purposely avoiding it... or do you just not want to acknowledge it?

 

Solo's failure is absolutely an argument for proof that Star Wars is in trouble. Every Star Wars film up until then was a major financial success - each earning hundreds of millions of dollars in profit. A Star Wars film loosing millions of dollars is indicative of a major problem with the franchise. When a Star Wars film can't guarantee financial success, you have a problem.

 

Solo was not "riding on the coattails of TLJ". "They shit out a turd" that was TLJ... which led to low "audience receptivity" with Solo. Plain and simple. They had better not "hope that some of it sticks". They need to move past TLJ and Solo ASAP.

 

"The character of Han Solo wasn't strong enough to demand a standalone film"? Nonsense. Han Solo is many fans' favorite character. Casting Han poorly was their first mistake of many regarding Solo.

 

Not firing Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy - for any number of reasons - is one thing. But RJ being given a SW trilogy and KK a 3-year contract extension is pure defiance. Don't think for a second that many fans don't realize this... and will respond in kind come Episode 9. You'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mattris said:

Don't think for a second that many fans don't realize this... and will respond in kind come Episode 9. You'll see.

 

What will the fans do? Bore us to death?

 

Ep 9 will make 1,5 billion worldwide at the very least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

You really don't feel the disenchanted vibe online, do you? Are you purposely avoiding it... or do you just not want to acknowledge it?

 

It's like Greedo shooting first all over again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

he Prequels did not do "more to harm it than these" Disney films... not a chance. You really don't feel the disenchanted vibe online, do you? Are you purposely avoiding it... or do you just not want to acknowledge it?

 

Depends on what you'd consider harm. They certainly didn't compromise the series' stylistic uniformity: they feel like they came from the same hand as the original Star Wars - although from the same hands as Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi.

 

But they were - for the most part - much lesser films than these Disney productions; and they did change stuff about Star Wars: the pseudo-science explaination of The Force, for instance.

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

Solo's failure is absolutely an argument for proof that Star Wars is in trouble. Every Star Wars film up until then was a major financial success - each earning hundreds of millions of dollars in profit. A Star Wars film loosing millions of dollars is indicative of a major problem with the franchise. When a Star Wars film can't guarantee financial success, you have a problem.

 

Solo was not "riding on the coattails of TLJ". "They shit out a turd" that was TLJ... which led to low "audience receptivity" with Solo. Plain and simple. They had better not "hope that some of it sticks". They need to move past TLJ and Solo ASAP.

 

"The character of Han Solo wasn't strong enough to demand a standalone film"? Nonsense. Han Solo is many fans' favorite character. Casting Han poorly was their first mistake of many regarding Solo.

 

I'm not sure that Solo tanked because of The Last Jedi. I just think no-one was particularly enthused for it, based on the concept of a Han Solo prequel. It has nothing to do with the character or the casting.

 

Its just that there's something wrong about Star Wars being an athology (like Marvel) and a unified story (like The Lord of the Rings) at the same time. For my money, pick one mode and stick with one.

 

2 hours ago, Mattris said:

Not firing Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy - for any number of reasons - is one thing. But RJ being given a SW trilogy and KK a 3-year contract extension is pure defiance. Don't think for a second that many fans don't realize this... and will respond in kind come Episode 9. You'll see.

 

Its not. Kathleen Kennedy isn't a director, she's a producer. Her job is simply to make money, and while Solo is certainly an embarrasment, overall her track record is friggin' amazing: comfortably over a billion dollars for each entry? That's bonkers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

You know what's going to happen, folks. Soon the promo campaign is going to kick off where everyone involved will be claiming that J.J. has created a genuine miracle and that Episode IX is not only their favorite Star Wars movie, but also their favorite movie, bar none. The hype is going to start to grow again, the fans will be drooling, and the disillusioned are slowly but surely building hope again ...

And then Star Wars will be discussed prominently AGAIN?!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the prequels I don't think a SW movie is guaranteed anything. Some fans feel that the sequel trilogy was wholly unnecessary since the saga is Anakin's story and he died.  I'm a huge SW fan and even I was skeptical going in to see TFA.  Fortunately I liked it and I thought TLJ was even better.

 

Then, despite loving TLJ I almost didn't go see Solo for a number of reasons. The Twitter stuff was not a reason because i didn't even know about that stuff. 

TLJ isn't the only reason Solo didn't make a ton of money.  There just wasn't much interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Demodex said:

Some fans feel that the sequel trilogy was wholly unnecessary since the saga is Anakin's story and he died.

 

In a way, I'm starting to feel that.

 

We'll wait for IX and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Its not. Kathleen Kennedy isn't a director, she's a producer. Her job is simply to make money, and while Solo is certainly an embarrasment, overall her track record is friggin' amazing: comfortably over a billion dollars for each entry? That's bonkers.

I have always read your posts with Thorin's voice. I must say, I couldn't stop laughing at this in my mind! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Depends on what you'd consider harm. They certainly didn't compromise the series' stylistic uniformity: they feel like they came from the same hand as the original Star Wars - although from the same hands as Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi.

 

But they were - for the most part - much lesser films than these Disney productions; and they did change stuff about Star Wars: the pseudo-science explaination of The Force, for instance.

 

I'm not sure that Solo tanked because of The Last Jedi. I just think no-one was particularly enthused for it, based on the concept of a Han Solo prequel. It has nothing to do with the character or the casting.

 

Its just that there's something wrong about Star Wars being an athology (like Marvel) and a unified story (like The Lord of the Rings) at the same time. For my money, pick one mode and stick with one.

 

 

Its not. Kathleen Kennedy isn't a director, she's a producer. Her job is simply to make money, and while Solo is certainly an embarrasment, overall her track record is friggin' amazing: comfortably over a billion dollars for each entry? That's bonkers.

 

In what other ways are the Prequels "much lesser films than these Disney productions"? Why do you think so many fans hate what Disney/LFL are doing?

 

If "no-one was particularly enthused for" a Han Solo prequel, then why did they make it?

 

And that's just it: Its failure does have to do with the character. Han Solo was tragically killed in TFA. Showing him as a (rather silly) young man - so soon - is just in poor taste. His casting did the film no favors.

 

Its just that there's something wrong about Star Wars being an athology (like Marvel) and a unified story (like The Lord of the Rings) at the same time. For my money, pick one mode and stick with one.   For some, uniform continuity would be preferable. But I don't think this reason hurt TLJ or Solo. On the other hand, insulting your customers intelligence - and literally insulting them - did.

 

How is what they're doing not defiance? Kathleen Kennedy is failing at her job. In just her fourth film, she managed to turn Star Wars into a loosing proposition. She's not just a producer. She is President of Lucasfilm. Solo was just one "embarrassment" of many. Her overall her track record is terrible: major writing/directing problems with every film... except the film the broke the fandom. She allows her employees to insult fans... and one - Chuck Wendig, who admitted to being "supported" by LFL - was fired by another subsidiary of Disney (Marvel) for his outrageous, profanity-laced language.

 

It's not "bonkers" that Star Wars films make "comfortably over a billion dollars". That should be expected in this day and age. And 'making a billion dollars' does not mean 'a billion dollars profit'. It's probably closer to $200M. I estimate that Solo lost all of Rouge One's profit.

 

1 hour ago, Demodex said:

After the prequels I don't think a SW movie is guaranteed anything. Some fans feel that the sequel trilogy was wholly unnecessary since the saga is Anakin's story and he died.  I'm a huge SW fan and even I was skeptical going in to see TFA.  Fortunately I liked it and I thought TLJ was even better.

 

Then, despite loving TLJ I almost didn't go see Solo for a number of reasons. The Twitter stuff was not a reason because i didn't even know about that stuff. 

TLJ isn't the only reason Solo didn't make a ton of money.  There just wasn't much interest. 

 

Why would the prequels affect new SW movies made by Disney?

 

Sure, some fans feel that the sequel trilogy was wholly unnecessary. But that is not a top reason why fans - or the general audience - would not go see the film at least once.

 

So Kathleen Kennedy and Co. went through all that production turmoil (and spent ~$450M) and "there just wasn't much interest"? Pure incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

Why would the prequels affect new SW movies made by Disney?

 

Not that they would affect the new ones, but they did show that a new SW trilogy isn't always good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

But I don't think this reason hurt TLJ or Solo. On the other hand, insulting your customers intelligence - and literally insulting them - did.

Wait, so you're doing all this because someone indirectly insulted you?

 

Didn't you (as a group) insult Kelly Marie Tran and, in this very thread, Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattris said:

So Kathleen Kennedy and Co. went through all that production turmoil (and spent ~$450M) and "there just wasn't much interest"? Pure incompetence.

 

Sometimes big budget films flop. Sometimes the studio assumes there would be big interest when there isn't. 

 

The big argument is whether or not TLJ affected whether or not people went to see Solo. We'll never know for sure. Yes, some people may have avoided it because of TLJ, but that's not the only reason it didn't do well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Solo flopped:

 

- A general lack of interest in a spinoff about a character that died in another movie 3 years ago, and is now being portrayed by a different actor.

- Lackluster marketing. I think the trailers did an awful job at promoting this movie. The movie I saw felt wildly different than what the trailers/TV spots were trying to sell.

- Immense summer competition from Deadpool 2 and Infinity War.

- The movie just isn't all that great. Strip away all the references and callbacks and you have a generic heist movie. They should've delayed the film until December to give them time to tweak it until they got it right, instead of plopping a half-baked product in theaters that the average moviegoer has no idea is coming out.

 

TLJ backlash has nothing to do with Solo's box office failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, John said:

TLJ backlash has nothing to do with Solo's box office failure.

 

I don't know.

 

If people left the theater after The Last Jedi unenthused, that couldn't have been good for Solo's box office.

 

Ultimately, its not the sort of thing you can rule-out all that easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chen G. said:

I don't know.

 

If people left the theater after The Last Jedi unenthused, that couldn't have been good for Solo's box office.

 

cinemascore.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Wait, so you're doing all this because someone indirectly insulted you?

 

Didn't you (as a group) insult Kelly Marie Tran and, in this very thread, Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy?

 

Underwhelming, unoriginal, or terrible movies + insults to the fans = avoidance of all products from LFL

 

Don't try to group me in with the tiny fraction of people that insulted and harassed the film-makers.

 

8 hours ago, Demodex said:

Sometimes big budget films flop. Sometimes the studio assumes there would be big interest when there isn't. 

 

The big argument is whether or not TLJ affected whether or not people went to see Solo. We'll never know for sure. Yes, some people may have avoided it because of TLJ, but that's not the only reason it didn't do well. 

 

Face it. A "big budget" Star Wars movie should never flop. Assuming "big interest" when there isn't indicates incompetence from the management.

 

It's not debatable. TLJ affected whether or not people went to see Solo, as well as numerous other reasons.

 

8 hours ago, John said:

Why Solo flopped:

 

- A general lack of interest in a spinoff about a character that died in another movie 3 years ago, and is now being portrayed by a different actor.

- Lackluster marketing. I think the trailers did an awful job at promoting this movie. The movie I saw felt wildly different than what the trailers/TV spots were trying to sell.

- Immense summer competition from Deadpool 2 and Infinity War.

- The movie just isn't all that great. Strip away all the references and callbacks and you have a generic heist movie. They should've delayed the film until December to give them time to tweak it until they got it right, instead of plopping a half-baked product in theaters that the average moviegoer has no idea is coming out.

 

TLJ backlash has nothing to do with Solo's box office failure.

 

- incompetence

- incompetence

- "competition" will prevent people from attending a Star Wars movie? Give me a break.

- incompetence. The "average moviegoer" knew Solo was coming out... TLJ + mediocre reviews + poor casting of the titular character = bomb

 

I have a read on the fans that skipped Solo. (I'm one of those fans.) Trust me, TLJ was the #1 reason for Solo's epic failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.